LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!!
 

check this out.
www.suprastore.com

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (r1hooligan)
 

sorry, this is the link
http://www.suprastore.com/lintwinc5vet.html

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (r1hooligan)
 

:bs :bs :bs :bs :bs :bs :bs

Obviously that C5 is running probably less than 5 psi of boost & it was on pump gas. On the other hand, that supra is running 25+ psi on race gas. Apples to apples please.

After all, who the hell cares about dynos? take it to the track for the real comparison :yesnod:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (Corvette4ever)
 

They just dont know...lol :lol: I will tell them what is superior.

A LPE TT Vette with a stock bottom end and its a automatic thats puts down 621rwhp. :smash: :smash: I get no turbo lag...V8 power :yesnod:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (r1hooligan)
 

That was my old T66 Supra 6speed's dynosheet compared to a Stage II LPE Vette convertible 6speed. I happened to race that car with that same Supra and the outcome was not good for the Vette, here's a link to the race story:
http://www.i-supra.com/6/ubb.x?a=tpc...57&m=469600457

The car inquestioned was tuned up to 551 RWHP at another dyno shop.

Corvette, that LPE Vette was not down on boost.

DJ, how about 874 RWHP in a stock bottom end Supra:)


[Modified by T66Supra, 10:53 AM 8/22/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!!
 

When you look at that dyno graph its really obvious why supra's always want to go from a roll. At 3500 rpm it has 160hp verses the corvette's 300hp. I know which one I'd rather drive.

Also, why isnt torque shown on this graph?

Eric

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

T66Supra

874 rwhp is not to bad.......Is 786 rwhp what u ran a 10.4 with?
I ran a 10.3 with only a little over 600 rwhp.....just think if I had 786 rwhp.

Dont get me wrong , your 10.4 is fast I just dont think dyno#'s mean everything.......

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (DJ Self)
 

http://www.corvetteforum.cc/zeroimg/...withstupid.gif

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (DJ Self)
 

DJ, I ran 10.4 and 143.2 MPH on 786 RWHP (I have never ran NOS on the track) on drag radials (lots of spinning) and with a curbweight of 3780 pounds with driver. The 10.4 (at 139.6 MPH) was done in Las Vegas (3000 feet above sea level) on 90+ degree weather. I know you know how much heat affects our cars based on the low 11's your car ran at the Vette and Viper gathering you guys had this last weekend, heat is a bit$h. The 143 MPH was done in AZ at 1300 feet above sea level on ~70 degree weather. My times were all done with a 6speed. Auto Supras are much quicker, Mark Cooper from NJ (I believe it's NJ) did a 10.2 with 660 RWHP at 3700+ pounds on drag radials. Imagine the time I would have ran if I had an auto, the Sp Supra that ran 9.54 @ 14X MPH ran that with less RWHP than I have at about the same weight.

Of course from a roll like that race (the one I listed) 6speeds do better.

Torque curve is shown lower in the page, here's the link:
http://store5.yimg.com/I/supra_1699_13248540

Low end torque is great to have, but lets just say that running a 10.4 without NOS with my current Supra, which is laggier than that T66 car thus making less low end torque, shows that all you have to do to run a good time is know how to launch, keep the RPM's up and there are no problems, yes even on the street.


[Modified by T66Supra, 12:15 PM 8/22/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

woop de doo! Makes me want to go out and buy a Supra! :bs Since your comparing, why did you pick that Lingenfelter to compare. :confused: How about the Lingenfelter 427 TT 9.2 1/4 mile and top speed over 225 MPH! :rolleyes: :cheers:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (racer44)
 

http://www.corvetteforum.cc/zeroimg/...withstupid.gif :smash:

http://www.corvetteforum.cc/zeroimg/...withstupid.gif

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (racer44)
 

Racer, I never said go out and buy a Supra:) That 9.2 @ 151 MPH car is impressive as HE$L, as is Titan Motorsport's 9.0 @ 160 MPH 6speed Supra on drag radials.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

At the Viper and Vette gathering I ran 11.4 with the boost controller off. :)
Witch is 5 psi. And torque is nice to have....I got over 700 at the wheels. :)

I know that u have a friend with a fast Supra and I know a guy who runs 9.2's back to back with a TT Vette.
I used to have a 1994 Supra back in 94 and it ran 12's @114 mph.(not bad back then)
Supras are nice cars and so are C5 Vettes. I just think the Vette is a better car to drive every day with this kind of HP.(no turbo lag/great from a dead stop/great from a roll/u dont need a big stall or N.O.S/V8 power...
And u can leave the head light in when u race......j/k

The Supra is nice and the Vette is nice.......
:)

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (DJ Self)
 

I agree DJ, although I don't need NOS, a high stall (my car is a 6speed) and have never taken the headlight off my car to race:) (I know you were messing around with the headlight deal) Lag is overrated, with a bit of practice and skill running good #'s and launching a "laggy" car is not that hard, my 10.4 on drag radials shows that, heck I have only had my current car at the track 3 times! Haven't been to the track in a while as I don't have a cage so I always get kicked out. I want to go out and run at higher boost and see if I can do a bit better, the pass after my 143 MPH pass I was going 2 MPH faster on the 1/8th and then missed 4th;( I think that pass would have been 145+ MPH. Unfortunately they kicked me out of the track so I didn't get another pass:(

I agree, Torque is very nice to have, I also have 700+ RWTQ at my disposal on NOS, or over 600 RWTQ off NOS:)

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

Hehe, nice comeback. :cheers: :cool:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (2000^C5)
 

I bet that car has nowhere the allaround capabilities of the LPE. Top speed, driveability, gas mileage, running pump fuel, non rice respect etc. etc. etc. etc.
:smash: :cheers:

By the way that LPE had 70 more MPH availablee on top end, how much more did the Supra have?........I didn't think so. :cheers:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (racer44)
 

Lets not turn this into a pi$$ing contest :D :cheers:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (racer44)
 

Lets see, my BPU Supra at 400.8 RWHP went 185 MPH and had some left when I let off, it was an auto too. My current car has another 376 RWHP off bottle and with a 7800 RPM redline the theoretical top speed at redline in 6th is ~235 MPH. The Greddy Supra in Japan went 229 MPH at 675 HP (their claims) at the wheels (675 PS actually) on a T78 turbo (T78's max out at ~650 to 675 RWHP), stock bodied, even had the same front lip as my car:)

As far as gas mileage, I don't care much about that but my supra gets ~18 MPG around town and 25+ on the freeway, not the greatest but good enough for me. Also that Vette that went 9.2 was tested on race gas:) Some people on this forum know about that. Not that I care as I run race gas all the time (40 to 50% race gas) as my friend's gas station 10 minutes from my house has 101 unleaded at the pump. Driveability on my car, as with most turbo cars, is awesome, idles great and off boost is as docile as a Camry, when the boost kicks is when all hell breaks lose.


[Modified by T66Supra, 2:18 PM 8/22/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (O-Ace)
 

O-Ace, I agree with you 100%:)

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

That is a good comparison, but somehow flawed ... 500RWHP is what a Stage 1+ is getting ... so the car was having trouble of some sort ... but the Supra did have a lot of power ... and from a dead stop the Vette would win because of the Supra's lack of power until 3500rpms ...

Otherwise ... COOL!


[Modified by AP, 3:45 PM 8/22/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

Theoretically doesn't cut it. I really don't know why I even posted here, as Supras do absolutley nothing for me. Sorry! You go on and keep posting on how much better your Toyota is than any other Vettes. It just seems that you are looking for acceptance that your car is worthy or something?? I have a question, (and I don't know the answer as I never go to the supra forums :nono: ) Do the LPE guys come on your forums bragging and looking for acceptance, I would be surprised if they did. I know I wouldn't! Now on to more interesting things, maybe I have a dull book I can go read! :D
:cheers: :seeya


[Modified by racer44, 2:00 PM 8/22/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

T66 Supra, For one, I appreciate you posting on this forum. I think the power you guys are able to make out of those cars is incredible, and on a stock bottom end.......... Please tell us what it takes to make that kind of power, and at what point do you go with a single turbo instead of two?


LPE TT650

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (AP)
 

AP, from a stop I launch my car at 7000+ RPM's, so there's no lack of power:) If that was the case my current car would be slower than the T66 car as the turbos are laggier, yet it is much faster.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (racer44)
 

We get lots of Viper guys (John Hennessey himself) Vette guys (No Mercy, and LPE guys such as the fellow from Washington), etc. at Supra boards.

I was not bragging on my car (I didn't start this thread, just responded) and based on the Greddy Supra going 229 MPH with significantly less HP than my car we can get a relative idea of top speed. Remember this is simple physics, a certain weight car with a certain coefficiaent of drag will go a certain speed given a certain amount of power. At ~925 HP at the crank on boost alone I doubt 220+ MPH would be a problem for my car.


[Modified by T66Supra, 3:32 PM 8/22/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (LANJET)
 

Thanks for the compliment Lanjet:)

As far as what is needed to make power like this, you are looking at ~$12K ($13K if you want over ~700 RWHP as you'll need cams, stock head stock cam cars max out at ~720 RWHP without NOS, cams run ~$1000) minimum in parts. The parts needed are an upgraded turbo kit (T88H is a good kit capable of ~850 RWHP about $3800 from http://www.suprastore.com, full fuel system (adjustable FPR, twin intank pumps, lines, injectors, fuel rail, etc. ($2500), then you need a front mount IC (~$1000 to $1500), gauges (boost, fuel pressure, egt, as low as $200 or as much as $750), clutch, (~$700), exhaust ($600), Blow Off Valve ($200), AEM computer ($1500) , boost controller ($400) . Most of these prices are a bit higher than they need to be but you can get a rough estimate, http://www.suprastore.com is a good source for prices.

You can spend much more than this though. The turbo kit on my car retails for over $10K and is normally sold in the high 7K range. You can spend $1800 on an intercooler, ~$1200+ on an HKS Ti exhaust, you can spend more on a boost controller. Some people also pay for labor I try to do as much as possible myself. I bought the car I have now with a lot of the parts it has and saved a bundle. And of course most people with these kinds of mods also do wheels, suspension, polishing, etc.

As far as twin VS single. The main reason to go to "big twins" on a Supra is for looks. The T88H can flow a bit more than my twin turbos.


[Modified by T66Supra, 4:43 PM 8/22/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

Oops, I got caught... :bb Ok, I want a supra. There, I said it. :eek:

T66 is always :cool:

I remember T66 posting and answering my questions about supra. :cheers:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (LANJET)
 

I think the real reason Supras can get high HP much cheaper than Corvettes, is market size ... their market is bigger ... plus it is engineered in Japan and a Turbo car already ... I really admire the 700RWHP+ Supra's ... it takes a lot of skill to make it work with that much HP.

The problem in the Corvette world is the market for TT's is small ... That is why it is cheaper on Mustangs and all other cheaper cars ... That is why ... if you want a fast car and still save money you have to go import, Mustang, or a classic Corvette ...

In 15 years, modding a C5 in your garage might be easier ... but today ... it is insanely hard ... but a high HP Mustang is easy ... cause the parts are still cheap and still considered "bolt-ons"


[Modified by AP, 5:28 PM 8/22/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (SlowC5)
 

SlowC5, I was trying to remember your handle:) You and No Mercy are always :cool: too:)

You should get a Supra TT, I for one would love to have both my Supra and a TT Vette in my garage:) And while I am dreaming a TT Viper too;)


[Modified by T66Supra, 4:40 PM 8/22/2002]


[Modified by T66Supra, 5:55 PM 8/22/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (SlowC5)
 

Slow C,

No deeeeep down inside you really want a F-16 JET... :lol:

Bill :cheers:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

Doh, nevermind.


[Modified by 66ImpalaLT1, 5:54 PM 8/22/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

Aww man, I don't want a flame war either but please don't compare Titan's 9.0 second stripped down gutted race shop car to an LPE customers 9.2 street car. The fastest 6 speed real true street car was SW's at 9.8 right? I think Marco has the fastest auto with a 9.4 right? I'm not talking about guys who race Supras for a living or have shop sponsored cars, I'm talking real street cars. You can't swing a dead cat at Supraforums without hitting someone with 700+rwhp. How many of those guys have hit 9's? How many guys are consistently in the 10's? You have to admit that the majority of the guys with this HP can't back it up CONSISTENTLY at the track. Hence the Supra highway roll legacy.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

If you take Titan Motorsports Supra and ensure that it runs:
1) Pump 93 like the LPE 427 TT did
2) Catalytic convertors like the LPE 427 TT did
3) No nitrous like the LPE 427 TT did
4) Stock-like interior trim like the LPE 427 TT has

then I'd think the best the Titan can do is 10s at 135 mph...and that's a guess as I never witnessed a cat-convertor pump fuel Supra run better than 113.x mph traps in cool dry high baro pressure air and 130 mph on pump fuel but no cat-convertors. This comes from the fact that pump fuel criteria on a 3.0L 2JZ will restrict boost to 22psi (25 psi if you push it), even with an efficient turbo. Slap on cats (even high flow units) and one is looking a ultra-lousy boost response...I'd say big turbos need 5200rpms to reach full boost but with an offroad downpipe and a lot higher with cat-convertors in place. If stock cats rob about 40 rwhp on BPU Sups, I think cats (even high flow units) will rob 100+ rwhp on big turbo'd Sups. That's simply too-much concession to make on a high priced car. While the LPE 427 TT is gobs more money and more work than the common big-turbo's Supras, all that money and work are paid off in something a lot more rewarding...which is full boost by 3500rpm, quieter than a stock Z06 (according to motor trend), smog-clean, and fast as heck w/o any nitrous with more left if one boosts to 20psi and uses race gas!

Both are great cars, but if the 427 TT C5 was allowed to run race gas along with boost and tuning to take advantage of that and run no cat-convertors I seriously don't doubt 170+mph trap speeds, maybe close to 180mph trap speeds.

So the popular motto goes:

Big-turbo'd Supra: "600/700/800 rwhp and idles like a Lexus [as long as you don't mind using nitrous to help spool the larger single turbos in drag runs, use an illegal off-road pipe, can live with full boost rpm of 5000 rpm+, and use race fuel to make over 650-700 rwhp]"

427 TT: "600/700/800 rwhp, idles like a Cadillac, quieter than a Z06 in the highway, cleaner than granny's Volvo, pulls like a big-block truck from low-rpms, and all on pump gas [as long as you don't mind spending beaucoup moola]"

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (STAGED)
 

Staged, that 427 car was running race gas on the 9.2 run, some people on this forum know that as well:)

Also I have persoanlly witnessed a T66 car run 10.6 @ 135 MPH with a highflow cat. A T66 makes ~200 LESS RWHP than a Greddy T88H. Put 2 cats (like the LPE car has) in parallel and I doubt the Titan car would slow down much, of course this is all speculation. Jim Leiferman here in AZ dynoed 411 RWHP without a cat at BPU and 410 RWHP with a 3" highflow cat. The 40 RWHP you are talking about is cars with stock cats, they dyno ~360 to 380 RWHP with stock cats (stock cats are VERY restrictive). As far as noise, Saad had a Greddy exhaust in his 904 RWHP Supra at one time that was quiter than stock (and a stock Supra is quiter than a stock Z06). I for one like some rumble from my car.

As far as "idles like a Cadiallc" that's an insult to the Vette if you are saying a Supra "idles like a Lexus":) As far as NOS, I have as laggy a turbo kit as you normally see and don't need NOS to run good numbers at the track. I do however not run a cat, but I bet most people with LPE cars do the same thing, get rid of the cats and make a bit more power plus it lets you run leaded race gas if you so desire.

I do think a 427 cubic inch can make more power on pump gas, maybe as much as 100 RWHP, but frankly I rather run some race gas than risk running too much boost on pump gas (specially since you don't know what you are getting). I have run as much as 22 PSI which is over 700 RWHP or over 800 HP at the crank on 91 octane.


[Modified by T66Supra, 6:38 PM 8/22/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (STAGED)
 

By the way Satged, there's a local Z06 with a 427TT package that raced a local Single turbo Supra that dynoed 598 RWHP. The 427 was running pump gas so he was running low boost and lost to this Supra (the story was posted here with the owner of the 427TT and the mechanic admitting the loss). I can make significantly more HP than 598 RWHP on pump gas.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

Motor Trend reported that all performance was measured with pump gas.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

That is true, the car in question was davidmax's car ... but street racing is not true racing ... and not an accurate way to say one car is faster than the other. Also ... ET's are not important because they rely on the drivers skill ... but MPH is the true measure of power and speed !!!

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (AP)
 

Q.What do 500,600,and 700 rwhp Supras have in common?
A.They all run 12's

Didn't Toyota stop shipping Supra's in 1998?
Hello,its 2003 calling!
I notice that most Supras are nothing but dyno queens and their 1/4 mile performance never matches the dyno numbers,it really does not matter what type of power they lay down,they are still outdated. :lol:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (akw408)
 

I realize that but I, and others on this forum, know people that were there, the car was running race gas:) No shame in that.

Devil Dog, I have seen my share of Z06's running 14's. So I guess I could say, what do 300 and 400 HP Vettes have in common? They all run 14's:) There's no such thing as a dyno queen car, there are dyno quuen DRIVERS. My car's performance, on radials no less, is a good indication of that.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

Give it a rest already! :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :sleep: :sleep: :seeya

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

The article makes a point about the CID difference but says nothing about the boost difference. Were they running the same levels of boost? I doubt it. Probably 8-10 psi vs. ~1.6-1.7 bar (24+ psi.) How about I run 24 psi on my built 5.7l V8 and see what happens! That would be a nice dyno comparison. :cheers:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (Godspeed)
 

Yes but low RPM torque around down as normal sane driving speeds is what makes a car fun to drive - this is why GM goes with V8's. Toyota went with the I6TT setup to meet emissions.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (racer44)
 

Yeah,you're right.
Its just another Supra post. :rolleyes: :crazy:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

So you're trying to say Motor Trend is a bunch of liars? Just curious. It'd be interesting to find out why Motor Trend would lie about something like that.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (akw408)
 

I know the 9.2 1/4-mile pass was done using race fuel. :yesnod:

Magazines do not always contain 100% accurate information. :nonod:

Take it easy guys. Some of these posts from Vette owners almost make me feel ashamed to be posting here. :bb

T66Supra is always very helpful and :cool: about things.

I have no problem with the original post about the dyno comparison. Looking at the graph, the supra is running very well! :smash: I am secure about myself and my cars. Some people take things too personally. :lol:

Unfortunately, the C5 TT graph is a little on the weak side. Feel free to take a look at my dyno graph (my normal power level for driving), http://temp.corvetteforum.net/c5/slowc5/

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (Godspeed)
 

I have a 1994 Camaro Z28 with boltons GOBS of low end torque, I find the turbo rush of my Supra much more fun than the low end torque of the Z. Basically I'm saying that not everyone will agree with you, that's your opinion and you are of course entitled to it:)

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (SlowC5)
 

Guys-

I would strongly recommend getting a ride or driving (as I was fortunate enough to do) a 600+ rwhp single turbo Supra before making any comments about them as an inferior alternative to the American muscle cars.

I had zero respect for the car until I got a ride. All I can say now is GOOD GOD. They are blindingly fast vehicles and you can mod them and get 100% reliability up to 600 rwhp for less than $10k all in. Try that on an american car.

That said, I would still take a vette over a Supra because the lag is really annoying to me. Below 3000 where you spend a decent amount of time....there is NO power. None. Even T66 admits that he has to launch at 7000 to get a good launch.

They are engineering marvels and definitely have a place in the sports car and highly modified sports car world, but after having V8 torque it would be tough to go to a single turbo with all that lag. My $0.02. Each to his own.

-Dan

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (SlowC5)
 

Thanks SlowC5 (your handle cracks me up):)

That car's dyno sheet is indeed low for the mods, the guy took the car to another shop, ProDyno, who spent time on the fun with LPE and with some minor tunning got 551 RWHP (the "kill" story on http://www.I-Supra.com has a post about this also) or 648 HP at the crank (right at the 650 LPE claims) which is more in line with what the car should have seen.

Your dyno #'s are very nice! What boost is that at? Do you ever go even higher while running race gas (or higher % race gas if you already run some)?

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

I tell people my C5 is stock. :D
My dyno was done running 11-12psi.

Yes, I have been running race fuel and use 14psi once in a while. Normally drives around at 12psi. :sleep:
Had an awesome "private testing" with a near stock Hayabusa while running 14psi. Got it on video, from about 70mph to 185+mph. :eek:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (Godspeed)
 

Godspeed, a properly built 346 to 427 cubic inch V8 at 25 PSI would make a TON of power, but that's not the car we are talking about. Not to mention that I'm not sure an aluminum block engine can handle that, you would probably want to switch to a cast iron block from a Chevy/GMC truck. Also to sustain 25PSI in an engine that big you would need some very large turbos, probably a pair of T72's, those turbos are huge and would most likely not fit as the turbos LPE uses are pretty small and barely fit (not much room left to upgrade).

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (SlowC5)
 

Nice, I have been known to tell people my Supra is stock with an exhaust and front mount IC or BPU;)

How was the Busa race? Did you beat it? I'm guessing yes:)

Have you dynoed at 14 PSI? Speaking of Busa's check this out, a 560 RWHP Busa!:
http://vca1.viperclub.org/cgi-bin/ub...7&topic=004995

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

I was about 1/2 to 1 car ahead at 185mph. :D

No dyno at 14psi, but I have some minor plans for the car. So, I might have some new numbers. ;)

560rwhp Busa! :smash: :smash: :smash: I think you need basketball sized balls to ride that thing. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (SlowC5)
 

Give me a break. :rolleyes: You can always post how great the Supra is over on the Supra forums, then you won't have to worry about us embarrasing you. :rolleyes:


[Modified by racer44, 9:54 AM 8/23/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (SlowC5)
 

Nice kill:) Did the guy know what you were packing or did you surprise him? What are these plans of yours?;)

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

I realize magazines do not contain accurate info all the time. I do know that the 427 TT C5 owned by one individual has these figures:

617 rwhp at 8.5 psi with pump 93
803 rwhp at 14 psi / with pump 93 and quarter mile duration only
more hp with 20 psi race gas

I have a hard time believing a modded Supra is quieter than a stock Z06. Stock for stock, the Supra revs much higher in top gear on the highway than a Corvette and it makes a lot more road roar (drove both extensively in several long trips to Level 10 Transmissions to repair my friend's Supra automatic trans) and irritating tire thunks on expansion joints. A friend who had 4 MKIVs discussed how tiring the exhaust boom gets when on the highway with his off-road pipe/free flowing exhaust setup.

As for thrill, I think both are way different. Some like the delay and sudden rush along with the futuristic jet-sounds while others like the rowdy neck-snapping thunder in most V8 domestics.

Someone told me a story about these big dogs that would never stop barking and one day this dude with his V8 domestic just started his monster up and revved the hell out of it. The dogs just shut up with foam around their mouths and a stupid stare. :lol:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

It was actually a friend on the Busa. So he knows. :yesnod: He is also an engineer, so he understands that I have the advantage at high speed. :D
A highly modded Busa will definitely take the win. Just :cool: to be able to hang with the fastest production bike.

Plans? You don't expect me to tell, do you? :p: :smash:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (racer44)
 

Come on racer44 ... you have to give credit when it is due .... the Supra is not a truely "fast" car from the factory ... but T66Supra modified his car and has high dyno numbers ... this thread was comparing the dyno's ... and nothing else ... and in this case ... the Supra won ... Supra's can do 700RWHP easier than the C5 ... but the Supra will never have the history the Vette has ... with more than 600RWHP ... it all comes down to driver skill ... and nothing else.

I dont see what you have against the Supra? Anyone who takes the time to modifiy their car, ANY car, should be repected ... it is just that the platform you are starting with is better ... but their platform is cheaper to modify ...

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (STAGED)
 

I think 900 rwhp can be had at 14 psi and pump 93 but without cat-convertors on a 427 TT. I don't see why 9.2:1 CR and 14 psi is not compatible on an aluminum head car. That's about 200 rwhp more than any Sup I heard on pump 93 (700rwhp) and truly all my friends with Sup feel no ease going above 550 rwhp on pump 93 when doing top-end runs. When you calculate that large rwhp difference, that's a huge flywheel hp advantage for the C5 which is also notably more aerodynamic and lighter.

The C5-R aluminum block used on the 427 TT is probably not a real weakness even at 1000+ hp. The aluminum blocked Ecotech 2.2L I4 is making well over 1000hp according to a friend of mine at LPE. Granted those in-line motors have some advantages with with strength versus a Vee motor, one still has to consider significantly more bearing wear from a motor with 6 cylinders trying to make as much power as a much larger V8 or V10 motor because a block that's in one piece is no good if all the bearings within are worn out.

Given such confidence of the Supra 2JZ's integrity and abilities, why haven't more import tuners jumped into the big-name tuner boat and turned out a 700+ hp warrantied machine yet? You'd think after 9 years it would've shown up at more than one (Motor Trend test of Akimoto Sup) big magazine (C&D, MT, R&T, Automobile) shootout. I would assume if all the above claims are true that it'd be an easy way for a tuner to look good through Toyota's engineering and design criteria.

Anyways, the Sups are still nice...in fact I sold Toyotas when the new Sups were new to the market. But the new C5 has an unbeatable number of paths to successful modification paths not to mention great recognition by racing freaks and mainstream alike.

Finally with the 10.6 at 135 mph emissions-legal Sup you witnessed, was it also on pump 93?

Anyways, I said enough...



[Modified by STAGED, 5:40 PM 8/23/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (STAGED)
 

Staged, people that have exhaust that "drone" on the highway chose to have them. The Greddy sp exhaust is quiter than a stock exhaust on the Supra. And a stock Supra (the level 10 car you were in wasn't stock I bet) is quieter than a stock Z06.

As far as what the 9.2 car was running, SlowC5 also knows it was running race gas, we both know people that were THERE during the test. 803 RWHP at 14 PSI on 93 octane is very impressive, I have run as much as 22 PSI on 91 octane, at this boost level I would be in the 720 RWHP range.

BTW my car doesn't have much road noise at all, sounds like you were in a Supra with interior pieces removed. Supras are remarkably quiet inside unless you get a loud exhaust (your choice).

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (SlowC5)
 

Nice:) I have raced several liter+ bikes, always fun to beat them and see their reaction:)

I was hoping you would spill the beans about your plans;) If you don't mind me knowing (since it's not likely we would race each other being so far away) feel free to email me the plans at mkivtrd@aol.com, I promise not to tell anyone:)

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (STAGED)
 

Staged, you clearly don't understand the aftermarket industry. Nobody would do a Supra package the way LPE does with Vettes because there are ~6000 MKIV TT's in the US VS over 150,000 C5's. And why offer a warranty when nobody else does and you still sell lots of product? Offers as little as you have to and get as much as possible for it, that's business.

As far as inline 6's. One of their huge advantage is having 7 mains (yes more mains than a V8), this helps considerably on high power motors and one of the reasons the Supra motor is so tough. Inline 6's are also inherently balanced, the only motor better balanced than an inline 6 is a V12. Lets not forget that that we are also talking of stock motors. Supra motors can be built like Bullish Racing's ~1500 HP 2JZGTE.

The T66 car I mentioned was running a mix of race gas and pump, the point was that a highflow cat is not as restrictive as you think. The fastest T66 car I have ever seen only went 10.3 @ 137 MPH (Chris Rado's car with a water to air IC packed with IC) no cat of course. So you see only a 2 MPH increase (indicative of ~20 HP) and that car was running much cooler intake charges due to the water to air IC with ice.

As far as 900 RWHP on pump gas, it could happen, but at this point is just speculation, and if I had such a car I wouldn't risk my $50K+ investment (engine) just to see if I can eek out a few more ponies on pump gas when race gas is readibly available.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

Oddly .. I think that the warranty is one of the factors keeping the C5's TT prices high ... more than just the LPE name ... and that out of the 6000 Supra owners ... probably 1/2 modify their cars ... while out of 150,000 C5's ... less than 10,000 are probably modified ... and less than 300 w/ TT's maybe 1,000 others with Superchargers ...

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

Just messing with ya... :yesnod:

No big secret plans. Maybe free up the exhaust a little, runs a little more boost, etc... Small little tweaks. :sleep:

Maybe big plans for my SlowCreamPuff. :D

Race fuel is such cheap insurance, it's hard not to run it.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (AP)
 

Hey, I respect making HP, but what I don't respect is when they come on a Corvette forum and every post is about one-upping the Corvette. It's our forums. Then stupid remarks about how some of these rebuttals by Corvette people to the "Supras are best comments" are embarrasing. What a load of crap. If these guys want to come and post here, fine, but if they are going to keep saying your car is great but mine is greater, in every category known to man, then they are looking for some feedback from the Corvette people. It's not just about HP, it's also about attitude! We do have another section reserved for "other" cars, maybe they should follow forum rules and post there. Sneaking the post in using a dyno comparison against a TT Corvette, then filling us full of Supras rule, doesn't qualify for it to be posted in the C5 Forced induction/Nitrous category. Just my Corvette Forum member .02 cents. :seeya

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (SlowC5)
 

SlowC5, I have a friend (Saad with the 904 RWHP black Supra, he also has a ~870 RWHP silver Supra and a C5 that will get TT'ed soon) that has a 1999 Viper ACr that he will be TT'ing. He may be interested in doing 2 cars;)

Those sound like good plans, not like your car is hurting for more HP!:)

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (racer44)
 

Racer, I didn't start this thread, I just responded to it as some people thought the dyno sheets were BS and then someone mentioned something to the effect of "Well that's just a dyno a race would be a different story" so I posted about that. You'll notice I have NEVER started a thread talking about my car:)

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (AP)
 

AP, I'm sure you are right on the Warranty cost. Anytime LPE has to do some warranty repair (I hear he's very good for his word) that's $$$$ spent!

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

I think there are few reasons LPE charges so high for C5 TT Packages...
1) 5-7 Weeks.... Thats a lot of labor... imagine paying your local mechanic 7 weeks of labor... ouch....
2) The warranty..... everytime someone needs warranty work... thats money out of his pocket...
3) A lot of the parts in his packages have to be hand crafted and fabricated by his company.... meaning they take time to make... which goes back to #1...
4) Quality.... hes definately puts it into those cars...
5) He's one of the only companies who TT's C5's.... he has no reason not to charge big... when more companies start Turboing C5's, I'm sure his prices will drop....

All in all you gotta give the guy some respect.... he's got quite the business happening :cheers:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

My point exactly, the guy who started this thread hasn't even come back to chat. He posted it for one reason, and one reason only can you guess what that reason was? :rolleyes: :troll

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (racer44)
 

I see your point ... and you are right ... that it is wrong to slam the Corvette on the CorvetteForum .... but he and you are able to freely express your opinions ... which is the great thing about this place

My Opinion regarding supras.
 

I have looked deep inside myself and found that I dont like supra's for two reasons.

1) Its obsolite, it was being produced in the early 90's. It is no longer made so you cant buy a new one.
2) Its heavy, at least 300lbs more then a C5...usually more.


If they bring a new supra to market, I will welcome it, but the old one is just a little to geriatric. :D

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (AP)
 

:cheers:

Re: My Opinion regarding supras. (IwishIhadAvette)
 

Iwish, they stopped production of the Supra in June 2002, the next one will be out soon.

Re: My Opinion regarding supras. (T66Supra)
 

T66- Do you have any information on what the new Supra will be like? Engine? Body? Turbo/NA?

It probably will be just as fast as the old one....but it will take 1-2 years before there are cheap reliable upgrades right? I guess the BPUs will be out almost immediately. Is there an

Re: My Opinion regarding supras. (Silver TT)
 

Silver, the next Supra may not be as good as the MKIV:( They are talking about a ~300 HP NA V6 for the base car and a ~350 HP NA V8, the car will be lighter than the MKIV so the V6 would be close in speed to a bone stock MKIVTT and the V8 would be a bit quicker but the easy HP gains achived by the turbo MKIV would be gone. Toyota is also working on a ~450 HP Ferrari 360 fighter (I bet it'll be a Lexus in the US) with a V10 or V12. Toyota already makes a 5.0 Liter DOHC V12 they use on a "limo" type car in Japan called the Century (old fashioned limo type car they have been building for a long time). They say the more likely engine would be a V10 based on the engine they are using in Formula 1.

I expect they'll make turbo kits for the NA engines, but it won't be as easy to upgrade as the MKIV.

By the way, was your Camaro a TT?

Re: My Opinion regarding supras. (T66Supra)
 

So the next gen Supra will be worse than the past gen ? that sucks ...

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (r1hooligan)
 

First of all, its just a DYNO. OK, lets just say that the LPE car was spanked, just for the sake of argument. why? Beause even the great ones , Force, Bernstein, Garlitz, havbeen licked, even by rookies.

What I find amazing is that the poster hardly considers the longevity of an LPE Car. So when the Supra COMPONENTS start falling apart, and the owner has To shell out a few thousand $$$, , the owner of the LPE's TT is cruising down to the neighborhood grocery store to pick up some groceries while also having a few more thousand odometer miles than the Supra since the race.

Many people can make a car go real fast for a few races at the expense of it not going at all a few thousand miles later.




[Modified by MarkFLC5, 10:53 PM 8/23/2002]

V8 supra
 

I really hope they do a V8. Yes it wont be as easy as just turning up the boost on a turbo 6, but that is a great engine, and I bet the platform will be super reliable... I cant wait to see what they come up with. If they make a 280hp 6 they will have to compete with the Z so lets hope they go V8....

ALSO: they make factory available superchargers right! What if they make that option for the next V8 supra! it would be 450hp! with a factory warentee!


[Modified by IwishIhadAvette, 9:12 PM 8/24/2002]

Re: V8 supra (IwishIhadAvette)
 

also if they bring the supra, nissan might bring the next skyline....combine that with the possible arrival of TVR and we will have a genuine international HP war....

Re: V8 supra (IwishIhadAvette)
 

A V8 Supra would be nice, but thats just it...'nice'. Even if it was making 450hp with a supercharger, BPU MKIV's would still be eating it for breakfast. And from the pictures I've seen, the MKV isn't gonna be much of a looker either. It appears that Toyota is gonna screw this 'sure thing' up, and they'll have no one to blame but themselves for it if it bombs.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

1) Aftermarket industry and warrantied low volume machines: Ruf, AMG (factory tuner but still separate entity like SLP is for GM), Hennessey, Autothority all offer warranties (supposedly) with their low volume machines. The are tons more Vettes, yet there are tons more Vette tuners that offer warranty assurance like MTI, Doug Rippie, Callaway, Mallett, and a whole lot more fighting for the exclusive tuner market.

2) You said a stock cat is very restrictive which I see about 40 rwhp difference with a BPU Supra. A high flow cat may reduce that to 20 rwhp on a BPU. But when you go to a large singe turbo Supra with lots of output, you're going to crank that difference between high flow cat and no cat back up. Again 100 rwhp on those making 800+ hp on Sups are almost a certainty. The 427 TT has high flow cats. The 650 hp/pump fuel Stage II 8.5 psi 346cid C5 runs with 4 stock cats!!!

3) I don't think the typical single turbo off-road downpiped Sup is anywhere near as quiet as a C5 TT (346, 427, etc.). Go to LPE's website and download the 427 TT quarter-mile run and you'll hear nothing but "white noise" old taxi-cab gushing sounds through its cat-restricted exhaust. I recall the silver Turbo Imports 10.6 sec. Supra (T66 turbo?) run with lots more noise from its exhaust. Add this to higher rpms needed in cruising at top gear and you definately have a more tiring ride in the Sup than TT Vettes. Also in normal around town acceleration, you're going to have to rev the big-turbo'd Sup a lot higher for a given acceleration requirement vs. a low-end torquey Vette (or even stock Sup) which also adds to greater noise levels.

4) My opinion is that a full interior no nitrous pump fueled smog legal Supra can at best do 130-135 mph traps versus 145-150+ mph with an equally street-legal and fueled C5. Pull the cats out and add race gas and tune accordingly and I think 150-160 mph can be had for the Sup and 170-180+ mph for the C5.

5) The difference of course is higher cost for the professionally done and warrantied setups for the C5 and the list of compromises for the Sup. Once you work to reduce the compromises with the Sup, you're back up to the cost of the modified Vette. Here's what I mean with an analogy. The small 3.6L twin turbo Autothority Porsche making a heady 750hp faired very well against the much larger displacement C5 TT. The Porsche has a fully blueprinted engine right down to titanium connecting rods to make it tractable in the road racing aspect where sudden and maybe unpredictable boost induced oversteer can slow one down.

6) From the standpoint of tractability, there are tons of reasons to go into the 3.0L Supra motor rather than leave it alone. So...take a Supra...and do the following in an effort to make the most tractable high output car: 1) install upgraded sequential twin turbos...very pricey, i think $8900 for turbos alone???; 2) efficient intercooler; 3) costly titanium connecting rods so that the engine can more quickly rev into its "boost range."; 4) mild Jun stroker crank kit (3.4L with some overbore as well) for slight improvements in boost response; 5) JE ultra-light series pistons to rev more quickly into the boost range; 6) race ported heads so that you don't need to go mega-high boost to make good hp and make it more competitive against boosted domestic setups; 7) ceramic coated exhaust manifolds to maintain the highest possible turbine inlet pressure and quicker spoolup; 8) automatic Supra rear end transplant into 6-speed Supra for better around town response...a huge improvement and I've seen many races of one with the automatic Supra rear and one without; 9) high cost valvesprings to extend the rev range near 9000 rpms since the automatic rear-end transplant at 8000rpm shiftpoints will shift the speed-shiftpoint relation to impractical levels; 10) custom grind cams phased properly to allow the best possible boost response...may help more than the small increase in stroke. Add all of the above, plus $1500 fuel rails (ridiculous as the C5 can use stock fuel rails), $900 injectors, and more and you have yourself a $50,000+ mod pkg done by a top dog tuner or $40,000 by a less reputable tuner w/o warranty. While I think the combination of above will give tremendously better drivability than a typical 700+ hp budget build Sup, I still don't think it will come close to a good ol' 427 TT.

Just like Supra turbo folks balk at the idea of a 1.8L turbo Honda making 500 wheel hp due to lag and other drivability considerations, I'm sure 346/427 TT owners are thankful that they don't have to live with compromises of a big hp Sup. In fact, look at the displacement jump 1.8L --> 3.0L --> 5.7 to 7.0L.

As for the 1500hp 2JZ, it's still off the TT small block 3rd gen f-body that is menacing the country with 6.9s and 2300hp. I know of production LT1 blocks making 1400 flywheel hp. So this 6-bolt main LS1/LS6 production block should be at least as strong if not much more. And the C5-R block is much stronger..heck it has a reputation for winning the GTS class in the 24 hours of LeMans with 650 hp. Let's see a 2JZ make 650 hp and last 24 hours (not to mention contribute to a win).

Re: My Opinion regarding supras. (IwishIhadAvette)
 

On a more general note Vettes still rule!!!

UltraFast Supra only mod route: big turbo, big IC, lots of lag, some squirt to get it out the hole.

Vette mod route (unbeatable selection): heads n'cam upgrade, roots s/c, ati and vortech centrifugal s/c, single turbo, twin turbos, solid lifter cam high revving screamer, hydraulic roller cam, stroker/overbore conversions up to 434 cid, nitrous, and combination of above.

My personal favorite is the 550 TT that has the right balance of affordability thanks to stock lower-end, street-legality, and drivability. Boost begins at 1100 rpm (0.25 psi) and reaches the full 4.8psi level by 2500rpm. 621 rwhp on race gas on slightly above 500 rwhp on pump gas (all through 4 stock cats) is plenty for that aerodynamic and reasonably lightweight (under 3400 lbs w/turbos) car.

Re: My Opinion regarding supras. (STAGED)
 

Old SW has mentioned that he has something wild up his sleeve for his next drag race-only Vette project. Hopefully he'll post something like a "7-Liter / 7 -second" windshield banner on. If he's listening also hopefully a solid lifter cam 7.0L, rev limit a 8000 rpm, and gobs of boost. Lots of boost, lots of revs, lots of displacement...YEAH!

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (MarkFLC5)
 

Mark, longevity is not a problem with Supras, that T66 Supra of mine never had a single problem and my current Supra at 786 RWHP on boost and 874 RWHP is holding up quite well:)

Re: V8 supra (IwishIhadAvette)
 

Iwish, they are talking of both a V6 (to compete with the Z) and a V8 (to compete with Vettes) for the next Supra. The same type of approach they had for the MKIV with the NA and TT. I would much rather see the car with an updated version of the 2JZGTE, but I doubt that will happen.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (STAGED)
 

Staged, your reading comprehension skills are not too good.

1) Warratied packages for a car where nobody has to offer warranty and still sell a lot of parts (like the Supra) doesn't make ANY business sense.

2) I already told you of Jim Leifernam's BPU Supra losing 1 RWHP with a high flow cat as opposed to no cat at all. Check out his website at http://www.turbosupra.com Also the T66 car I mentioned was clearly within ~20 HP of a catless car running on a water to air IC full of ice.

3) What part of Saad's car WITHOUT cats with a big turbo with a Greddy SP being QUIETER than a 100% bone stock Supra (which is quiter than a stock Z06) didn't you understand? The car you saw may be louder because he WANTS it to be louder. I had a Tannabe G Medallion exhaust on my HKS car when it did 786 RWHP off NOS and 874 RWHP on NOS, the car was about as quiet as stock, I then switched to a Apexi GT Spec because the Tannabe was too quiet and dynoed 780 RWHP off NOS, much louder and didn't flow any better, but I WANTED the rumble and that's why I got it. I know have a HKS Ti exhaust which is the loudest exhaust I know off and I know I didn't pic ANY HP up.

4) You keep saying "If this, if that" and I tell you "If my aunt had balls she would be my uncle". I have yet to see a C5 run 145 MPH on pump gas, and 170 to 180 MPH traps for a street C5 (or just about ANY street car) is a pretty ridiculous #. This shows how little you know about the subject.

5) There are no compromises for the Supra and the LPE cars making killer HP levels with an adjustable boost controller carry NO WARRANTY. He warranties only the cars on the base package, cars with adjustable boost controller carry no warranties.

6) You really have gone of the deep end haven't you. Custom cams are not needed, there are plenty of cams available for the Supra. A stroker kit is also not needed, not even the 7.05 second Venom Tundra truck with a 2JZGTE is using a stroker kit, or titanium rods, etc. Please do yourself a favor and do some research so you don't look like a "fool". As far as "tractable" power, 10.4 on drag radials on my car without NOS at 3000 feet elevation on 90+ degree weather shows that the power is quite tractable. Or Titan's 6speed Supra running 9.0 on drag radials, etc.

I have an LT1 powered car (1994 Z28) and I know the block can't handle 1500 HP unless it is reinforced, nice try. As far as the aluminum block LS1/6, they are very strong, but at very high HP level is will be compromised, the LT1 is a cast iron block and it still needs to be reinforced to make big power.

As far as the C5R cars in Lemans, they race in the lower class (and don't use production blocks anyway), Toyota owns the record for the fastest lap ever at Lemans to this day with their GT1 car of THREE years ago. The were leading the race by LAPS when they lost a gearbox (not made by Toyota) that apparently couldn't handle the power the engine was putting out.

You need to do some research, your knowledge in this field is ngligible.

By the way what do YOU drive?

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

Fool??? No reading comprehension skills??? More research??? You got it the other way around.

Look T66Supra, your participation in the CorvetteForums is appreciated but regarding...

Your lack of reading comprehension: You belittled my proposed dream Sup setup. It doesn't take an Einstein to figure out that I was aiming toward MODERATE OUTPUT at the LOWEST POSSIBLE BOOST AND QUICKEST SPOOL-UP FOR A STREET SWEET SETUP not equal, but definately a lot closer to large displacement turbo'd cars like the C5. When you mentioned the drag-only 2JZ-powered 7-sec. Tacoma, you clearly showed that you missed the whole point of my earlier post. And there's no need to educate me on high output and stock cams (my friend has a '98 MKIV that made 69x rwhp, 6-spd, T-88, 25 psi, race gas). That guy with the T-88, who's diehard Supra all the way, admitted 5300rpm full boost rpm. My setup costs more but is far better balanced and should make 650+ hp with awesome response on pump gas. There are of course more enlightened Supra owners regarding this. Did you see Steve Theodore's (MKIV owner and I think a moderator on that board at one time) post in Supraforums on his account of the C5 TT Stage II? In a nutshell, he says it delivers a sensation unlike any mega turbo'd Supra he's ever ridden in. "Liquid" output was a word I remember to describe the seamless and wide powerband. This goes back to my earlier post about "tractable." Full-tilt race cars don't need to be tractable, or well mannered. But street machines are always referenced against tractability as judgement of how well designed/engineered/executed the setup is. So my idea of tractability IS NOT massive prolonged lag and then sudden violent rush of power as Steve Theodore pointed out in many of the 650 rwhp+ Sups he has been in. If you ever keep track of 2.7L Skylines (speaking about my knowledge of R34s), they start to go into the engine with cam and possibly head work at approx. 500 flywheel hp on up so that they can make the required power but not all on an oversized turbo, but a smallest possible turbo(s) for the given requirement.

Your foolishness: The 1 rwhp loss as you mentioned didn't correspond with the ~20 rwhp loss I saw. On something that's normally a 40 rwhp loss, the high flow cat you claim reduces it to 1 rwhp? You don't even have you even calculated the percent improvement to know it's absurd or a pending Nobel Prize achievement. There's something obviously corrupting the comparison and if it makes you feel better it is a lot like the 80 hp gain claimed by one dyno service on just a Borla cat-back on an otherwise stock C4 which everyone dismisses. I can't believe you are so naive to stand behind such a result. Cat-conv construction between OEM and aftermarket are too similar to offer such a dramatic flow improvement. The main improvement when going to an aftermarket high flow cat is the reduction of 2 cats to one and if applicable, a larger diameter used.

Trust me I've known about Supra potential and weaknesses since they came out when I sold Toyotas back in the early to mid 1990s. A host of my good friends had MKIVs with all sorts of tuning states including BPU (auto/stick), 6-speed/auto rear end setups, dry/wet nitrous, T78/T88/other big turbos, etc.

My project cars included my 1995 Trans Am which back in 1998 dyno'd 579.4 peak rwhp (@ 11psi) and 510 lbs-ft. rwtorque at 3800 rpm (@ 5psi) and 380 lbs.-ft rwtorque at 2000 rpm (at 1 psi or so). It was featured in Hot Rod April 1999. The best e.t. was 11.83 at 129.3 mph, again thru cats and pump 93 and Firestone SZ-50s; I drove my gfriend another 150 miles give or take after that particular drag run with A/C and disc changer on. Again, the car made those hp figures with pump 93 and through random-tech cat-convertors in 1998. It's certaintly not as powerful as your Sup, but it was respectable and unique for the time. I was also featured in another magazine using my dad's daily driving Pontiac Bonneville S/C which ran 14.525@94.1 mph 100% stock right down to the Goodyear Eagle GAs. This was in Oct. 1997 issue of High Performance Pontiac. But the fast runs were made as early as 1996, also not bad for the time.

So while my own projects were featured in 2 magazines, I also have a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering. The speciality is in themo-fluid sciences. I can send you my publications for your evaluation as well. They are highly regarded, so much so that my advisor was asked by an IBM official to be part of the benchmarking committee for electronic cooling immediately after my presentation. There are similarities in the physics of my research and one of the physical features in engine design, particularly K-H instabilities that govern fuel injector spray breakup. I'm a member of Society of Automotive Engineers. Plus, I rewrote and proctored the internal combustion lab experiment at my school; dyno and exhaust gas analysis of a late 80s QUAD 4 engine where specific fuel consumption, brake efficiency, and a host of other calculations were made. All in all, my insight and perspective from theoretical/analytical to experimental to computation to hands-on hot-rodding practical experience and press feature are hard to fault, even if you had over 3 magazine features and hold a M.D.-Ph.D.

The C5-R in LeMans racing sure doesn't use production blocks, but they can sure be bought at the dealer and installed in production Vettes. I know and respect the Toyota LeMans car you mention a lot. However, that motor cannot be readily transplanted into a Supra. Here's another evidence of your logical miscue. Also I think a One Lap Supra blew its motor. Now while it had a stock and fairly high mileage motor (and it ended up as a top 5 finisher), the One Lap event can hardly be considered grueling. It's just a couple laps or so under the timer per track for just a handful of tracks. It's only grueling for the participants.

After being in BPU Supras and a number of Supras with large single turbos, I still don't buy this outlandish quietness story and I'm sure others don't either. But you're entitled to your own opinions at the risk of loosing more credibility.

Next, I never suggested or even implied that those who raise boost beyond what was intended in those C5 pkgs would keep their warranty. That fact is obvious to anyone.

Furthermore about the warranty: I never dispute the words of this part of your post. I'm just stating that C5 clientele tends to be more discriminating when it comes to the level of service and assurance (warranty) not to mention the other qualities like the potential to have speed, drivability, pump fuel operation (if needed), and ultimate daily tractability in one package. I'm fully aware that the Supra tuner community has their hands full of business even without the need to offer explicit warranties, even on big ticket bmpr-bmpr and bottom-up buildups.

I forgot to mention in my original post and something which I think I mentioned earlier, I know of a 3rd gen. f-body with small block and twin turbos running over 200+ mph in the traps. Years ago everyone thought 160mph traps were unimaginable in a Sup, which is not the case any more. So why is it unreasonable to surmise by logical deduction that the mos aerodynamically slippery of the three mentioned along with excellent goods such as the C5-R block is unable to reach 170-180 mph trap speeds? Your Sup pride has gotten the better of you.

In a summer issue of C&D, I recall a road test of a 4.8 psi EPA legal 550 pkg C5 that trapped ??133 mph??, and I think skipping 2nd gear. All I can say is that the C5 speed market is still in its infancy and we have yet to see its potential realized. The MT test of that 427 TT C5 with 9.2 at 151 mph thru cats-convertors is just a warm-up. The game of "oneupmanship" is just under way in the C5 camp and we have a whole lot of eyebrow raising "Oh my God" performance numbers on the way!!!

One thing's for sure. The Supra definately got the ball rolling on having 700-900 hp machines that idle well and pull Hayabusas on the highway. In fact T66Supra's Supra looks to be one of the most impressive MKIVs I've personally read about. But (there's no denying) the C5 takes everything from where the Sup leaves off and gives the possibility of running 9s on pump gas (even if 9.2 was done on a race mix, high 9s should still be doable with pump gas), emissions-legal, quiet thanks to that added cat-convertor noise buffer, and wide seamless powerband. Once we see a 4-door fancy grocery getter Cadillac CTSi with a 427 TT putting up 9s or low 10s and just as quiet/clean/pump 93 fuel'd then we know we've truly entered a golden age of street car drag racing.

OK. I said enough and spent way too much time on this thread...



[Modified by STAGED, 6:56 PM 8/27/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

This post is going nowhere fast, but I'd just like to know :

1) Where can I get this amazing high flow cat that only costs me 1hp? Seriously, I'd be interested in getting it.
2) Where can I find an amazing aftermarket muffler that is quieter than the stock muffler? And who buys these?
3) Who is going to build a 1500hp car without doing basic stuff like reinforcing the shortblock?

Interesting information about the 427TT running race gas in the MT article. According to the article however, they could turn the boost up on pump gas for just the short duration of the 1/4. Are you sure you haven't confused it with that?

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (akw408)
 

That's exactly what I've heard again and again. I'm not trying to dispute that the actual MT test was done on fuel other than straight pump as some claimed simply because C&D accused MT in the past of doing whatever's necessary to sensationalize its audience. However, I'm sure that the guidelines are 8.5 psi on pump gas for all speed ranges including top-end. 14 psi on pump gas for brief 1/4 mi stints. And more on race fuel. Of course LPE spec'd a 9.2:1 CR. A lower CR to the tune of 8.5:1 could raise the pump fuel boost friendly range a lot higher. Whether its Supras or 300Zs both with 8.5:1 CR and alum. heads you can run 17 psi or so with near stock timing curves (for long top end runs safely) provided the fuel enrichment is there and turbos/IC are providing relatively cool charge. I can't see why an LPE won't be able to run 17 psi or so for top-end runs; more boost can be run with more timing retard and shorter duration. Provided the boost is efficiently (actually even if it's inefficiently produced) produced, that's a lot of output.


[Modified by STAGED, 3:38 PM 8/27/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (STAGED)
 

t66 nice car, numbers and attitude. Do you have a stutter box for your Supra? I see many Supra owners complain about the launch with the manual tranny (bpu++ cars) and wonder how many try a stutter box. I have turbod my ls1 TA and read all I can from you guys and the Gn guys.
The ls1 is really starting to head in the right direction with forced induction now that we can edit fuel/timing with ls1edit. Hopefully we can learn from you guys instead of fight over who has the biggest d#%k :)

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (akw408)
 

AKW408, read SlowC5's post on the race gas issue:) Like I said I and others on this forum (such as SlowC5) actually know people that were THERE during the test and know the car was running race gas.

As far as the highflow cats, when you have a 3" exhaust capable of sustaining 900+ RWHP (Saad's 904 RWHP Supra had a 3" exhaust) on a BPU car making 411 RWHP then you know the 3" exhaust is more than enough. You then get a 3" high flow cat capable of well over 650 RWHP and the high flow cat (Random technologies) will no longer become a restriction. Dropping 1 RWHP proves that, it's all about fluid dynamics. You can see this car at http://www.turbosupra.com

As far as the quieter than stock exhaust, it's a Greddy SP exhaust, on Saad's silver Supra without cats this exhaust was quieter than stock. This exhaust has THREE mufflers.

As far as 1500 hp without reinforcing, the cars I mentioned have forged internals but no block reinforment.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (cablebandit)
 

Cable, there are stutter boxes available but I don't have one, and I agree with you 100% about learning from one another:) People like staged with misinformation and lies is what hurts forums:(

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (STAGED)
 

STAGED, you clearly do not understand high performance/HP engines.

Steve T. has never ridden in a 650+ RWHP Supra, ask him and he will tell you the same thing.

As far as cats, you are speaking of REGULAR PRODUCTION CHEAP CATS, not high flow cats. See my previous post about the reason why it willonly lose a small amount of power, it's all about fluid dynamics. You are also WRONG about going from 2 cats to 1. Two cats in parallel flow better than 1 or 2 cats in series.

I don't buy your claim of ANY experience with Supras. I can tell by your posts all your "knowlege" comes from reading forums, etc. I also do not buy AT all your claim of a PHD based on your complete lack of knowledge of fluid dynamics.

As far as quiet exhausts, once again you prove your lack of knowledge on the subject at hand, the exhaust is question is a Greddy SP exhaust with THREE mufflers.

As far as 180 MPH traps in a real street Vette (or just about anything) once again this shows your total lack of knowledge on the subject. That TA you mention is not a real street car, PRO STOCK cars are in the low 200 MPH.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

Bench Racing :)

Staged,

I've got a 650hp twin turbo LS1 and its been super reliable and I would assume the LPE car is just as reliable, minus tranny issues on Auto's which will be around no matter what.

But who knows the real reliability....I've put 13K or so on my motor and its tight as can be which amazes me everytime I get in it.

On the other hand, if you've ever pushed the gas in a 600+ hp car, regardless of its a Supra or C5, or anything, your perspective will change. Bench racing about 600+hp cars without ever driving one doesn't make too much sense, you have no basis for your arguements.

I like the F-body because its an amazingly cheap platform to make power, so is the used C5(my next plan), but for street driving fun the Supra has them both beat.

No where else can you make the power it makes for the money, the peaky boost bothers me too, however you cannot argue with the numbers they put out.

I've been so much on the fence as to get a Supra or a C5 for the next car...I'd really like to get a big twin sequential, keep the low end boost and torque without moving to a big single but its an exspensive setup, the C5 would be cheaper at that point.

Styling, blah...I'd drive a brick if it was fast :cool:

Hell our Miata will make 300rwhp and be a little peaky too, but I prefer driving a Miata hard than driving a C5 hard, and I've driven both exstensively. I was going to get a C5 vert but decided against it, if I bought another convertible I'd rather drive the Miata.

There is alot to be said about a cars personality don't forget, and as I said until you've plopped your butt in one and drove it there isn't much sense trying to compare things without some first hand experience.

Tossing these numbers around is like tossing hand grenades with no experience, most likely given either a 600hp car or a box of handgrenades your going to end up hurting yourself.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

I don't buy your claim of ANY experience with Supras. I can tell by your posts all your "knowlege" comes from reading forums, etc. I also do not buy AT all your claim of a PHD based on your complete lack of knowledge of fluid dynamics.

Ok, I tried to keep quiet, but now it's gloves off time. T66Supra, I can assure that STAGED does in fact have a Phd., and he earned it under circumstances and adversites that you can't imagine. If you do a search off all of his posts, on this forum, or any other forum, all of his comments are backed by both acedemic and real world experience. Your comment of the fact that a high flow cat only costs 1 horsepower makes every thing you say after that pointless. How can you even think such a thing? On a small displacement, stock, NA motor, maybe. But on a Big cube and or a forced induction application, there is just no way. As staged said, there is just not THAT much difference in converter internals. The biggest gains come from increased diameter, not some magical internal construction. I could go on, but what's the point? Bottom line, if you want to come here, and share you knowledge of Supras, great, glad to have you. But, when you try to call out someone who has more formal education than you (and me) it's not needed or wanted. I'm posting this because STAGED is far too humble to get into a pissing contest with you. I, however, am not.

Greg
:cool:

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (NoOne)
 

Eric, have you run your Z28 at the track with the turbos? Sounds beastly! I wouldn't mind putting turbos on my LT1 Z28:) On a side note today is the last day of production for the Fbody:(

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

OK here we go again:

Here is a sample publication during my grad studies: http://link.springer.de/link/service...6/10370563.htm ...you will see the name is the same as in the car performance articles as mentioned...and you'll see testimony to my thermo-fluids knowledge not to mention knowledge in programming, optical measurement techniques, etc. I'd love to see your scientific publications regarding fluid mechanics as well. As far as I'm concerned, it's you who's getting scientific info from hanging out at speed shops and the internet.

Which car is quieter: I know of that Greddy exhaust as my friend has used it on his BPU Supra (which he later swapped out for a HKS unit emphasizing flow capacity with surprisingly noticable results even at BPU level). Certainly exhausts can be ultra quiet, for example stock exhausts, but this is not about exhaust. Even though I mentioned one particularly Supra with loud exhaust, I was talking about which car is quieter and the only Sup which I know that's comparable to a stock Z06 is a 100% stock Supra right down to the factory air intake box. The only way to settle this is to perform measurements. But as I said before, I have my doubts. Heck, even the stock turbos on BPU Supras become so vocal that that alone raises interior noise levels dramatically under load. And remember what I said about road roar.

Cat-convertors: Tell me about Fluid Dynamics, let me give you some chalk and go up to the board now. Next, I never recall a discussion about 2 cats in series vs. 2 cats in a parallel arrangement. Do me a favor and address the topic on hand. As for aftermarket cats vs. OEM cats, the OEM cats in general offer the highest COMBINATION of most comprehensive after-treatment cleaning with the minimum degree of flow loss for the targeted engine output. Aftermarket cats improve on that by compromising the after-treatment effect (one may still see extremely low readings at the state emissions facility with an aftermarket cat though) for the benefit of flow improvement. This is analagous to PCM reprograms that compromise the safety that automakers build into their PCM maps for the more performance focused individual. The gain nevertheless is not eye-opening as you will see the basic construction is similar to OEM cats.

As for others who claim my lack of experience in Supras, that's ridiculous. I've basically seen it all in person. Back when I was doing performance runs at Englishtown for High Perf. Pontiac, I piloted my friend's BPU automatic Supra to 12.279 and 12.4x on inappropriate road race BFG R1s, half a second faster than the owner ever got. He kept saying "This is bullcrap" because it was the first time I ever piloted his car down the track. I've driven in 6-speed conversions in originally automatic Sups capable of 10-second timeslips (BPU+NOS)...and many more.

As for 200+ f-body, I know it's pro-stock which I never said it was not but the 170-180 mph trap speed street car exists. Real street of course has different definitions with different people. My definition of "real" street, a word you just added in the last post, is emissions-legal, pump 93, broad powerband, quiet, etc. As far as C5s are concerned (w/few exceptions), the C5 wins that hands down by nearly 20 mph traps speeds over the fastest Supra under the same restriction. There are single-turbo'd production wheel-welled Mustangs out there running low 8s near 170mph plus its street driven. C5-R block avail. for C5 is more advanced than the decade old design of the aftermarket block on that Mustang and the C5 is much more aerodynamic for great speed increase in the second 1/8th mi. of the track. The 170-180 mph trap speed C5 that will come sooner or later will of course need race gas, off-road pipe, etc. that doesn't fit into my definition of "real street," but it should be streetable as a typical single-turbo'd Supra that runs 520-650 rwhp on pump 93/off-road pipe on the street that turns up the wick on race gas at the track. By no means have I ever trivialized this feat as I can imagine this to be a large undertaking. Yet, if magazines are reporting 9.2 at 151 mph now with 14 psi through catalysts on LPE's first 427 TT attempt, does it really seem unrealistic to set the next goal at 170-180mph traps especially with the help of relaxing the cat-convertor requirement, the allowance of full race gas running, maybe dropping the CR below the 9.2:1 level to maybe 8.3:1 (give or take) to run more boost, etc.



[Modified by STAGED, 11:58 PM 8/28/2002]

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (NoOne)
 

I owned a 579 rwhp car, which calculates back to 650+hp (back in 1998). I mentioned that earlier. In fact, my car was at/near/above 600 flywheel hp since early 1997. Please see Hot Rod April 1999 p. 84 and on. The article is titled "The Smog Squad." The article quotes 572 rwhp, but that was with my Borla full muffler diverter plate installed.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (STAGED)
 

Just the title of this post kills me,,,this is what people are resorting to now...as if dynos are winning races now. Get out to the track and settle it...anybody can dump a bunch of money into a car and have it dyno high numbers....can you drive it though....I get tired of seeing all the Supra crap on the board...but I guess they have to show up somewhere because they don't show up at the track...however they will show up at the dyno. It seems like anytime you start talking turbos people want to go to the dyno...what happened to backin it up at the track...this reminds me of the S/C vs TC thread....everybody is dynoing,,,but nobody is puttin it up at the track.....lets see some slips from all the talkers.

Re: LPE TT c5 vs supra turbo dyno!! (T66Supra)
 

Don't listen to this clown. A 3" cat (high flow or not), cannot sustain something in the 600-700 hp range engine without major restrictions. This guy is attempting to misinform forum readers. But it's so outlandish, nobody believes it. Even a friend with a '97 Camaro with a T-Trim was severely restricted to 540 rwhp and one 3" random-tech. cat FOR EACH bank of cylinders (and the cats were not clogged). I somehow made more with dual 2.5" random techs (again one for each bank of cylinders) due to other variables, but it was a restriction nonetheless.

You keep mentioning fluid dynamics...so can you rationalize the 1 rwhp loss? Another thing, cat-restriction like a 3" cat providing after-treatment for a 650 hp setup will cause serious tuning issues. Output loss is then two-fold: Not only does one have pumping loss issues, but the tendencies toward detonation is so much higher when you have SEVERE cat-restriction. You really have to limit boost and timing for the given octane. Please take a 600 hp car that runs nicely with an off-road pipe and without changing anything else slip in a 3" high flow cat and look at the knock retard readings. I had to back off timing a lot when adding 2 2.5" random tech cats on my approx. 600 hp setup.

In fact I recall a recent post on the Vette forums on a C5 in the 400-500 rwhp range with something like 20 rwhp loss between random techs and no cat. And again this is TWO cats (one for each bank, and the total hydraulic diameter of both exceeding one 3" cat) for something in the 400-500 rwhp range. This loss is similar to that I saw for BPU Supras without and with a 3" high flow unit.

Remember: dynos may be quantitative, but it is by no means a sufficient condition for being "scientific." To be scientific you must add in appropriate measurement procedure and uncertainty analysis. I've seen a number of tests where the baseline was done in very hot conditions (for which correction factors don't correct well) with a hot engine. Then the comparative measurement was made with a cool engine in much better atmospheric conditions.


[Modified by STAGED, 11:52 PM 8/28/2002]